Washington’s Plan to Partition and Break Up Syria

Planners of the war on Syria are surely wearing a “macabre smile” on their faces as they see their ruse achieve the desired outcome.

As expected, the declaration of a “democratic federation” in northern Syria has created quite wide-scale confusion and controversy, and has re-charged a lot of the previously charged emotions. The move was surely a malevolent one, and if ignored it will entail dire consequences for Syria’s unity and viability, and if fiercely faced and repelled it will lead to another trap of more in fighting and feuding. So how should Syrians react?

The move is obviously a smokescreen designed to obscure vision so that several objectives are lost in the fog. Why do I say this?

Firstly, the announcement was made at « al-Remailan » city (basically an Oil Field, where the US was reportedly building a military base under the pretext of its on-going alleged activities to fight ISIS/Daesh). Secondly, “forces” already receiving full US support, bearing a striking resemblance to the ill-famed previous announcement of the so-called Opposition “National Syria Council”, made the announcement. So the move should be seen as a US-UK one and not a “Kurdish” one, especially as it includes “representatives” (proxies) of so many other ethnicities and “communities”. It is essential to take this key element into consideration when analyzing the move; otherwise we fall in the trap time and time again.

Here we have to remember these key elements:

“Kurds” have recently gained worldwide sympathy as Turkish atrocities against them have been widely reported and exposed.

Some of the “Kurdish” militias have been extensively propagated by mainstream media, and others as a “key force” in the fight against IS/ISIS (Daesh).

The timing of the announcement comes just shortly after joint Syrian-Russian operations managed to cut the oil smuggling routes to Turkey.

So, the US-UK war planners wanted to capitalize on the first two key elements by deflecting condemnation away from their NATO ally, Turkey, and pre-empting any potential counter move by the Syrian government, which is already under a fierce media campaign. And at the same time, they wanted to provide an alternative oil-smuggling route for the on going plundering of resources.

In other words, the move is an obvious political spin.

Secondly, the US-UK war planners are now in need of a “fresh horse” to ride, after their old one (ISIS) has been totally exposed and can no longer serve their objectives. Remember, in this respect, the recent statement by the US Secretary of State John Kerry, in which he described Daesh atrocities as “genocidal”. This statement was made shortly after the US Congress unanimously voted for a similar classification.

Thirdly, the move should NOT be viewed as a “Kurdish” one for several reasons, mainly because there is no “Kurdish consensus” on the move.

The Kurds, as we know, are not a single unitary mass. There is an array of political parties and organizations carrying “Kurdish” flags who are presumed to be serving “Kurdish aspirations”, but not all of them agree on everything, and many of them have been “infiltrated” by one of more regional or international “Intelligence” service apparatus.

Even as a “community”, not all Kurdish communities are the same. There are several confessions and affiliations within their ranks. Over and above, not all of them share the same historical, religious, cultural, or demographic background. So to deal with them as a “lump sum” is unfair and unrealistic.

What is more important to bear in mind is the fact the Kurdish issue is a time-bomb left by the post-WWII colonial powers (mainly the British and French) who deliberately carved the Middle East map in a way that would retain certain “ticking bombs” that could be detonated at will.

So, if the Kurds have any grievances, they should lay their complaints and grievances at the doors of these forces that deliberately put them and the region in such a fiasco, instead of sparking feuding and inter-fighting with their fellow compatriots of other ethnicities and faiths.

It remains to be said that many Kurds who live in Damascus, Homs, and elsewhere in Syria have been enjoying full citizenship rights all along, and Syrians have never practiced any discrimination against them. That is why you may see many of them as leaders of functioning political parties and many others in key government positions. Let us remember that Syria’s highly esteemed religious leader, the Late Sheikh Mohammad Said al-Bouti, was a Kurd, and the Syrians following him never viewed his ethnicity as something to be wary of. To the contrary, he has been viewed with a lot of due respect and reverence.
Some of the Kurds who had experienced some difficulties are the ones who have taken refuge in Syria and were not properly accommodated for in the 1961 census (population statics). This took place before the current Ba’ath Party assumed power (just to be fair). Yet, our President has instructed for their complaints and legal status to be properly settled.

We should also bear in mind that the war planners have deliberately created a multi-layer, multi-phased circle of fire around Syria, so once she overcomes one she will be trapped in another. One commentator rightfully said: Syria would find it extremely difficult to repel this barrage of concerted attacks against her simultaneously from all directions.

All these points and more should be taken into account before jumping to any conclusions in terms of this newly detonated “time bomb”, which we hope that Syria, its people, and leadership will wisely work together to defuse.